Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword or section
Like this
1Activity
×

Table Of Contents

0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Land Value in Similar Adjacent Village Can Be Taken to Determine Compensation in Land Acquisition 2010 Sc

Land Value in Similar Adjacent Village Can Be Taken to Determine Compensation in Land Acquisition 2010 Sc

Ratings: (0)|Views: 2,336|Likes:
The power of compulsive acquisition has an inbuilt element of duty and responsibility upon the State to pay the compensation which is just, fair and without delay. It is the price which would be payable to a person after the complete appraisal of land with its peculiar advantages and disadvantages being estimated with reference to commercial value. Thus, other consequential right, legal or commercial, which remotely flows from an agricultural activity will not and should not be treated as a relevant consideration. The potentiality has to be directly relatable to the capacity of the acquired land to produce agricultural products or, its market value relatable to the known methods of computation of compensation. It is a settled principle of law that lands of adjacent villages can be made the basis for determining the fair market value of the acquired land. The evidence tendered in relation to the land of the adjacent villages would be a relevant piece of evidence for such determination. Once it is shown that situation and potential of the land in two different villages are the same then they could be awarded similar compensation or such other compensation as would be just and fair.


The power of compulsive acquisition has an inbuilt element of duty and responsibility upon the State to pay the compensation which is just, fair and without delay. It is the price which would be payable to a person after the complete appraisal of land with its peculiar advantages and disadvantages being estimated with reference to commercial value. Thus, other consequential right, legal or commercial, which remotely flows from an agricultural activity will not and should not be treated as a relevant consideration. The potentiality has to be directly relatable to the capacity of the acquired land to produce agricultural products or, its market value relatable to the known methods of computation of compensation. It is a settled principle of law that lands of adjacent villages can be made the basis for determining the fair market value of the acquired land. The evidence tendered in relation to the land of the adjacent villages would be a relevant piece of evidence for such determination. Once it is shown that situation and potential of the land in two different villages are the same then they could be awarded similar compensation or such other compensation as would be just and fair.


More info:

Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See More
See less

08/01/2011

pdf

text

original

 
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIACIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL No. 3838 OF 2010(@ SLP (C) No. 20767 of 2008)
 
Special Land Acquisition Officer AppellantVersusKarigowda & Ors. RespondentsWITHC.A. No. 3839/2010 [@ SLP(C) No. 21730/2008], C.A.Nos.3840-3841/2010 [@ SLP(C) Nos. 3971-3972/2009], C.A. No.3842/2010 [@ SLP(C) No. 31169/2008], C.A. No. 3843/2010 [@ SLP(C) No. 7293/2009], C.A. No.3844/2010 [@ SLP(C) No. 9875/2009],C.A. No.3845/2010 [@SLP(C) No. 10393/2009], C.A. No.3848/2010 [@ SLP(C) No.15773/2009], C.A.No.3849/2010 [@ SLP(C) No. 19684/2009] and C.A. Nos.3850-63/2010 [@ SLP(C) No. 31096-31109/2009].
JUDGMENTSwatanter Kumar, J.
1. Leave granted.2.All the above appeals under Article 136 of the Constitution of Indiaraise a common question of law based on somewhat similar facts and
 
are directed against different judgments of the Karnataka High Courtand the judgment of the Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division) andJMFC, Srirangapatna (hereinafter referred to as the “Reference Court”).
3.
Civil Appeals arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 20767 of 2008 and 21730 of 2008 are directed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (for short the‘SLAO’) and the Managing Director Irrigation Board (for short the‘Board’) respectively, against the judgment and order dated 23
rd
January, 2008 passed by the High Court in MFA No. 8544 of 2007,whereby the High Court enhanced the compensation of the acquiredland to Rs.5,00,000/- per acre for the wet land (garden land).
4.
Civil Appeals arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 31096-31109 of 2009 aredirected against the judgment of the High Court dated 22
nd
February,2008 in MFA Nos. 6924 of 2007 (LAC) C/W Nos. 6925/2007,7289/2007, 7290/2007, 7291/2007, 7292/2007, 7294/2007, 8541/2007,8543/2007, 8545/2007, 8546/2007, 8549/2007, 8551/2007 and8553/2007 (LAC), whereby the High Court while relying upon its judgment in the earlier cases granted the compensation at a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- per acre for wet land (garden land) and Rs.2,53,750/- per acre for dry land.
2
 
5.
Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No.31169 of 2008 is directed against the judgment of the Reference Court dated 16
th
March, 2007 in LAC No.219/2006, vide which the learned Court granted compensation atRs.2,92,500/- per acre in respect of wet lands (garden land).6.In other words, we will be dealing with the above appeals as well asother connected appeals, relating to the same acquisition, preferred bythe State against the judgment of the High Court as well as that of theReference Court. At the very outset, we may also notice that objectionwas raised with regard to the maintainability of the appeal against the judgment passed by the Reference Court.7.Simple but an interesting question of law that falls for consideration of the Court in the present appeals, relates to the ambit and scope of Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) – whether, manufacturing or commercial activity carried on by theagriculturist, either himself or through third party, as a continuation of the agricultural activity, that is, using the yield for production of someother final product can be the basis for determining the fair market
3

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->